Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1887-01-17
AFTER MANY YEARS.
Was Chatfield Bigamist?-An Interest,"
ing Case in Court.

Was Chatfield Bigamist ?-An Interest,"
ing Case in Court.
Some weeks since Richard Chatheld, by
his attorney, General A. /. Hart, filed
petition in the Superior Court OF this
county, asking that Thomas F. Chatfield be
removed from the administration of the es-
tate of H. B. Chatfeld, deceased, and peti.
toner be appointed as such. Also, asking
that the said Thomas F. Chatfield be re-
quired to render an accounting of his ad-
minlstration of the estate. The petltloner
claims that at the time of the death OF ID.
B. Chatfield his only surviving heirs were
Richard and Silas Chatfield. The case on
its face would not indicate that it was OF
more than ordinary interest, but II the
petitioners succeed in establishing the
truth of what they assert, it will prove one
of the most interesting cases in the Court
records of this county. Richard Chatfield
came to California last summer on an ex-
cursion train with two purposes in view
one to see the State, the other
TO VISIT HIS FATHER.
On his arrival here he found that the latter
was dead. At least he was told that his
father had gone to Mexico, and in that
country had been murdered. He COM
menced Immediately to look up the prop
erty of the deceased, to which he claims he
and his brother are the legal heirs, the re-
suit of which was the commencement of
this suit. Petitioner claims that at the
tine of his fathers death the latter was
worth in real and personal property So
600. He has been unable to ascertain
description of his fathers personal effects,
and hence asks for an accounting by the
administrator of the estate, Thomas r.
Chatfield. Petitioner recites that Thomas
f. is the son of one Amy E. Chatfield, who
claims to be the wife of the deceased, but
whom the petitioner believes was never
legally married to deceased. In 1863 or
1870 deceased received q deed to some land
near Florin from J. Keebe. Shortly after
receiving this deed
H. B. CHATFIELD MYsTERIoUsLY DIsAP-
FEARED.
Petitioner believes his father to have been
murdered, but says he is of the opinion
that his remains are not buried in Mexico,
but repose in this county in deep grave
on the ranch he purchased from Keebe.
He says that some time after his fathers
mysterious and prolonged absence, Amy
+. Chatfield procured another deed and in
her own name from Keebe, on the ground
that the first had been lost or destroyed.
He further believes that the procuring of
the second deed was for the purpose of de-
frauding the rightful heirs to the estate.
In February last Amy E. Chatfield sold the
real estate for $4,000.
The case came on for hearing Saturday
before Judge Van Fleet in Department Two
of the Superior Court. The petitioner was
represented by General Hart and the re-
spopdent by Beatty & benson and Grove
L. johnson.
The first witness called was Mrs. Amy
E. Potter, formerly Mrs. Amy E. Chatfield
In response to questions by petitioners
counsel she stated that
SHE WAS LAWFULLY MARRIED
To H. B. Chatfeld in Concord, Michigan,
by Justice of the Peace by the name of
Bigelow. She could not produce her mar
riage certificate, claiming that it had been
lost Several questions were asked witness
regarding the procuring of the marriage
license, which were objected to by witness
counsel, who claimed that it was no part of
petitioners case, and that he must first
prove his own standing in Court. General
Hart claimed his right to prove by the wit
ness whether or not she was lawfully mar
ried to deceased. After considerable argu-
ment the Court ruled that for the present
the objections would be sustained. Witness
was asked if she had picture of deceased.
She said she had, but, on advise of her
counsel, refused to give it to the opposing
attorney.
SISTER OF THE DECEASED
Was next called to the stand. She is the
aunt of the petitioner, and arrived from
Chicago, where she resides, Friday last.
Her name is Mrs. L. Wilson. Deceased was
her eldest brother. She had known Mrs.
Potter since the latter was II years of age.
The deceased had another wife besides Mrs.
Potter. His first wife's maiden name was
Lucy Perry. He lived with her in Latrobe,
New York
Witness was asked if she had record of
the first marriage, and she replied she had,
and also the family Bible containing the
record of the marriage in the handwriting
of her father On visit to his sister,
some years ago, accompanied by whom
now is Mrs. Potter, deceased mutilated the
Bible by cutting out that page having the
marriage record. He assigned as a reason
for so doing that he did not wish his wife
to see it, for
IT WOULD MAKE HER JEALOUS
If she knew he had another wife. Witness
demanded the leaf and he returned it. Sub
sequently deceased told witness that his
first wife was dead, and that he had found
her grave. The family Bible was then pro-
duced and subjected to close scrutiny by
the opposing counsel. The slip which was
cut out contained the following:
Henry Chatfeld and Lucia A. Perry. joined in
holy matrimony on Wednesday, March Is, 1s4l.
Witness then gave brief history of the
Chatfeld family. claiming that the de-
ceased's legal wife was Lucy Perry, and his
ka,r oh hOrr, 10 hi,, NV
her-namely, the petitioner and his brother
Silas.
j. H. Wolfe, who was at one time JUS
tice of the Peace in Brighton township,
testified to making out a deed for some land
once, but he did not remember whether it
was in the name of Amy E. Chattield or
II. B. Chatfield.
Both sides desiring time in which to
gather testimony, the case was continued
without day. The defense claim that they
can substantiate every fact which they are
called upon to produce. Important devel-
opm ents may be expected.